TJ Brodie if Toronto wants to clear cap.

Panicking about goaltending, solution is fleecing Calgary

Flames decline pretty easily

to play will lagesson on the top4? lmao why would they move their only defensive reliable dmen

Flames say no

Goaltenders rarely bring in a huge package, looking at the past. A good comparison to this is the Jack Campbell trade. However, Markstrom brings in less due to his age. The retention is the Kyle Clifford of the trade, Nolan Foote is the Trevor Moore of it.

Vanecek at 3.4M for 1.5 seasons is a cap dump, one that will cost at least a 2nd. Foote is leaning towards a bust. 23yo and can't crack the NHL. Little to no value. So basically, the 2nd and 3rd, in 2025, might not even cover the cost to dump Vanecek.

Markstrom, who plays good when the team in front of him isn't a dumpster fire, along with 1.5M of retention for multiple seasons, will cost SOMETHING.

Yeah, goalies don't generally bring in huge hauls, but the trade is a downright fleece. What is the incentive for Calgary? They take on bad cap, some almost worthless picks, a useless prospect, and give up a good goalie signed for multiple years. Can't really use a 2nd in 2025 as a core piece of a rebuild, not that they want to rebuild. They are better keeping Markstrom and retooling with him.

It is exhausting repeating this over and over to folks on this board: teams are under no obligation to trade their goaltender to you.

Propose a win-win trade with a team that has incentive to trade a goalie, or make a real offer. Stop pretending that the market has no impact on value and that goalies universally are traded for almost nothing. If the trade you propose is a good deal for your team, then it likely would have already happened.

Lmao Devils fans are hilarious. You all want a legitimate starting goaltender because your goaltending sucks but aren't willing to pay the cost to get it. Jack Campbell was a pure backup goalie in LA with a career high of 25 starts and 31 games played in a season. Jacob Markstrom is a top 10 starting goalie in the league. So no that is not a comparable example at all. On top of that you guys complain about his age and cap hit like it's a huge burden. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

What exactly is the incentive for Calgary here? The entire concept of them trading one of their 2 NHL goalies is to being Wolf up to the NHL by at latest next year. Taking on Vanecek who has another year of term does not help that at all. On top of that Foote is bot a good prospect, just because he was drafted in the first round does bot mean he has value 5 years later if he hasn't developed into anything. His projection at this point is probably a 4th line grinder (ie Michael McCarron in Nashville). Then you want Calgary to retain on top of that? The Flames have retained once in history and that was the expiring David Rittich contract, our owner is dirt cheap, there is next to zero chance he will ever retain on a multi year deal.

If I were to break this trade down in a vacuum it would be:
Cost of taking on VV = 3rd
Cost of retention = 2nd
So that leaves just Foote for Markstrom. Which is laughably bad

Actually Foote for Markstrom at 6 mill checks out. Markstroms almost certainly will not provide 18 mill in value over the next 3 years

Lol sure man. Keep bashing the things you want.

18 mill is a top 10 goalie contract over the next 3 years.

Here's a list of goalies who have played at a top 10 level from ages 34-36 since the lockout:



That is the list in its entirety.

The only ones to even have a positive GSAx while maintaining a starters workload:

Mike Smith: 18
Rinne: 6
Luongo: 2
Lundqvist: 0.6
Miller: 0.2

Again I'm willing to take the short term gain (although not anymore with all the injuries we have), and pay for that by being the ones to pay his contract that he almost certainly will not live up to next year or the year after.

I'm not willing to pay meaningful assets, unless he comes with a return policy where we can send him back to you when he almost certainly falls off

Why would a trade have already happened when NJD's GM doesn't believe in acquiring goalies midseason outside of injury reasons, and is on the record as stating this?

Bring it up consistently with the people who keep creating ACGMs where NJ trades for a goalie as long as Fitz is GM, I suppose. I will going forward, since that is much shorter to type than my wind-baggy opinions. I guess we can shut this one down!

In reality, NJD got bit by the injury bug hard this year, so it is probably true that spending big assets on a goalie is silly right now, regardless of the GM's philosophy. They are not out of it yet this season, but they have plenty of runway left in their competitive window. No sense in blowing through assets now.

Especially an older goalie. NJD isn't gonna pay major draft assets for an older goalie with a big contract that probably ends up ugly in a year or two (I'm looking at you Gibson and Markstrom), unless they're either basically free or significantly retained.

Unfortunately every fanbase is convinced their goalie is magical. If a goalie has played well lately it's going to last forever, and if they're playing poorly it's just a brief slump. Despite how little goalies actually go for in real life, I can name 40 goalies in the NHL that the fanbases on here would claim are worth at least a 2nd, and like 25 that are apparently worth a 1st.

I've got a new rating system for goalies

if the fanbase thinks he's the best goalie in hockey, he's top 10
If the fan base think's he's top 5, he's top 15
If they think he's top 10, he's top 20
If they think he's a starter, he's top 40
If they think he's a competent backup, he's top 60

How many times do we need to go over this. I don't care of you are willing to "bite the bullet if he comes dirt cheap." You can't approach negotiations that way. Like imagine if you were GM and gave Conroy a call saying "Hey we really need a stud goalie right now so we want Markstrom, but since he's 33 with 2 more years after this I don't think he's worth much. So either you have to retain a big chunk of his contract and we'll offer you like a 2nd, or we'll only offer you this reclamation project." That would be the fastest *click* in trade call history.

Again Calgary has zero incentive to trade him. He's been excellent, he's proven to be excellent in a mentoring role, and he loves playing in Calgary too. If you can't even try to offer something of interest for the Flames then go bother someone else for a goaltender of stick with your bottom of the league tending, hoping it turns around

Didn’t you state a few days ago that your owner was a cheap ****?

Seems like there’s 20 million reasons to trade Markstrom.

Surely Norris winning defender Erik Karlsson went for a massive haul this offseason? Wait I’m being told because of his age and contract he actually went for very little. That he got a single 1st, and 3 cap dumps

He's not Melnyk cheap as in internal caps. But he was very willing to pay Gaudreau and then was willing to pay Huberdeau. However he is cheap in the sense that he doesn't like paying people to be employed for someone else (ie retention). I bet the Sutter firing really annoyed him too

Lmao you are delusional. Goaltending is your problem. Not Calgary's. We are not shopping Markstrom, so if you want him you have to offer something that makes sense for the Flames

Again, just recently you stated the Flames owner is cheap as ****. Markstrom is due 20 million dollars through a rebuild. Seems like a cheap owner would be very eager to get that off his books